Chinese military exports to other countries
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
There is only really 2 ways this sale is really going to end.
1) The customer is buying this for novelty's sake or merely as an act of pleasing.
2) They might really have a need for it, in which case they will have a need for a significant number.
The former choice is likely than the latter, that's because there is really few countries in the world of which a lightweight howitzer is really in need. A full sized howitzer with a longer barrel length can get the job done and more and without the almost assuredly guaranteed higher price tag the AH4 demands due to the need for specific materials to reduce weight without lost to durability.
Those countries that does actually have a requirement for the AH4 either don't have the financial capacity (in which case the Sino D-30 howitzer better suits their needs) or they already have access to other lightweight artillery pieces.
The AH-4 is one Chinese exports that I don't see any prospects of much success, the angle which it is marketed is just to niched and pricy.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I would not count the AH4 out that easily.
The key attraction of super light artillery over conventional artillery is the ability to helo-drop them, either in remote/inaccessible areas, and/or for rapid reaction forces.
The attraction of the AH4 is the triple benefit of lower costs; plausible deniability and no soured relations if these pieces get spotted where they shouldn’t be, like in neighbouring countries uninvited for example.
There has been a bit of a sea change in the Middle East in their views towards Chinese weapons, thanks for their first hand experience with Chinese drones especially.
That has opened a lot of doors for other Chinese defence products that those rich countries would have previously have categorically dismissed Chinese arms as ‘cheap and inferior’ and only for poor countries.
even the Venezuelans paint their planes better than our PLA.
When you have literally nothing left, appearance is the last resort.
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
How does using a artillery piece of a class which is only really made by 2 (maybe 3 if you count in Britain BAE) country in the world makes for plausible deniablity, in fact 155mms caliber artillery are produced by so many countries that plausibility deniability is somewhat a given already. Diplomatic relations depends more on a case to case basis of nation's relationships and political landscape, not by artillery pieces.
Then there is the whole thing about these being easy to transport and yada yada so on. Being airlifted by helicopter is a bonus yes, but how many of China's potential customers have the need or even the necessary equipment to do it ? Last I check, the ME (which is where X country is said to reside in by the media sales pitch) is mostly a wide open desert ground where trucks are a far more economical method, not that these countries have much in the way of helicopters in the first place, Afghanistan is the only country with the geographical terrain which a lightweight howitzer can find it's place, but the only way Afghanistan can actually afford this is by trading and arm and a leg for it. And even then, the D-30 is a far more logical choice for them for mountain warfare, it actually weights less then the AH4 and range is not an issue given the kind of enemies they are expected to face. This is not even account the fact that it is way more cheaper both to buy, maintain and use.
While Chinese military equipment is gaining traction in the world yes, that does not mean that every single weapon China put's out is going to sell well or be seriously considered. The AH4 is one of these, because simply put what it can do, existing artillery pieces can already do and way less the price.
It is like the luxury brand of peanuts, pun not intended, while it will certainly taste way better then the other offerings, there is no reason why a standard bag will not do. What makes this comparison more prominent is ironically China is also marketing all the other kinds of artillery that I make mentioned off, including the 155mm PLL-01 which while weights heavier, blows the AH4 completely out of the water by it's range, and there is the PLL-96, which weights 1.3 tons lighter than the AH4 while still retaining a respectable caliber and range of 27kms.
Last edited by a moderator:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I agree that the whole PD argument is a stretch. Fact is if some one starts hurling Artillery shells from this class of howitzer it would not take to long to realize that there is a fight starting and who is probably to blame.
This is where you Victor are wrong. A number of nations in the middle East have the ability to operate helicopters and for a howitzer the ability to be airlifted is a major selling point. Since who is the buyer is not said it may even be a party with amphibious expeditionary forces.
Farther more the middle East is not just a eternal track of flat desert there are lots of mountain ranges that break up the desert and even highland and low lands and of course the gulfs. As well as wetlands and even some arborial terrain. Any one of these may be better served by a lighter cannon.
You go into a rant on Afghanistan although well know for its mountains they are not unique to it. Pakistan also has a number of mountains and highlands connecti
ng into Afgansistan same for Turkmenistan
But not just there the middlle east has a number of mountain ranges across Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Oman,Yemen and Lebanon. Even Egypt has mountain terrain.
Some are especially politically sensitive.
Unless you as a nation have removed or never adopted the 122mm Howitzer ammunition. Commonality of the 155mm shells can justify the buy.
Now vs a Pll01 you are correct there a over match in range. Yet as the US proved that actually doesn't mean all it seems. Remember in the Gulf war the Iraqis had Pll01 comparable 155mm howitzers they faced off against US forces who had and continue to maintain shorter 39 calibre guns and lost. It's not always about the power of the gun it sometimes is more about can you employ the weapon most effectively.
On paper a desert eagle is a awesome gun. But a 9mm can be just as deadly if you hit the target right. For a Expeditionary force or mountain troops AH4 would be a awesome weapon
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
True enough
It is actually Viktor, not Victor. But nevertheless, operating helicopters is definitely not the same as being able to use helicopters as mobile source of transport efficiently, for one, there different classes of transport helicopters and also attack helicopters. And the last time I check, neither Saudi or Iran and the rest of the ME for that matter has the kind of helicopters required in significant numbers to justify such a purchases, and even then neither of these countries have the kind of money that the AH4's price will demand.
And geographically Pakistan is located closer to Asia than the ME, but people just like to lob it in with the rest just simply cause they are also Muslim. Even then, the Pakistanis too lack much in the way of helicopter transportation.
Also how well a cannon will maneuver on certain terrains is more related to how well it's weight is distributed rather then the overall weight of the gun. In most cases, modern artillery has proven to have few conditions in which they cannot be moved as easily as the rest of the ground forces.
Once again, the issue of politically sensitivity is rarely resolved by using weapons provided by a specific country. But rather by diplomatic tradecraft, if that is not achieve even a crate of guns is going to cause as much controversy as a batch of howitzers. As you have pointed out earlier, plausible deniability will not go away simply by using a certain caliber of artillery, there is no reason why political sensitivity will do the same.
That is a valid argument, however at the same time seeing as the 122mm has been used by almost half the globe (including the entirety of the ME and Pakistan excluding SA), the chances are extremely low that the Country X in mind has no experience in 122mm artillery. While those that don't mostly prefer Western sources for a myriad of political and economical reasons. And those that have access to the AH4 will have to ask themselves the question of why would they want a artillery piece that will cost them by some estimates 10 times the price of a conventional artillery when they can get a similar performing artillery at the latter price ? Shell commonality and familiarity can only account for so much.
The Gulf War was a war that was principally determined by airpower, with artillery rarely playing and decisive role.It is a rather strange example of warfare to be brought up in this topic, moreover the US has the advantage of GPS, radar tracking and satellite surveillance. Most of Iraq'rs artillery and strategic assets are taken out by raids and airstrike, while counter battery are done mostly via MLRSs as this excerpt states :
"
The Gulf War was a demanding battlefield on which to measure the attributes of the U.S. Army field artillery: both Corps moved great distances; the enemy had a significant range advantage; and there was plenty of air power to provide close support. For the ground forces, the real kings of lethality were the maneuver units, armed with Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and Apache attack helicopters. About the latter: the VII Corps, deep attack (Apache) battle captain was the Corps Artillery Commander, who was initially reluctant to launch those magnificent aircraft and crews into an unknown enemy air defense environment. Finally, however, after two nights of chomping at the bit, the 11th Aviation Brigade, commanded by COL Johnny Hitt, was launched, twice during the night of 26-27 February 1991, with devastating results against the enemy forces.
So what can be said for those “European” artillerists, including those from Kansas (1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley), Texas (1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood), and Arkansas and Oklahoma (142d FA Brigade), in the Gulf War? They won their counterfire battle, hands down, by using what was available. Outranged by the enemy, they got help from the Air Force to help level the playing field, then used raids and UAVs to finish the initial job. When the Iraqi artillery finally spoke, they were quickly silenced by the radars and MLRS."
However once the tables were evened and those perks removed, range plays a decisive part in this. A good example would be the Vietnam war where the US's shorter ranged guns where constantly outranged by the Vietcong's 130mm M-46, and with terrible results.
But even then what you said can equally be attributed to the D-30 as well. While it's range is shorter than the AH4 it makes up for that by being way lighter as well as being able to fire in a 360 degree arc without having to be redeployed.
But in all said, I must stress the fact that the AH4 in its class is a solid weapons. That was never in doubt, however it is still a very niche class which the few targeted nations would be unlikely to spend huge money on. The only fault it ever has was that it has to compete with the D-30.
Last edited by a moderator:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
It doesn't matter if the country in question has experience with 122mm Howitzers it's if they want to retain 122mm D30 Howitzer.
155mm has more or less the world standard.
This means 1) active production and avalibilty of access to rounds from China, the US, Europe, Singapore, South Africa some middle east makers or even the Russians to some degree . Where as D30 has a smaller range of options for shell makers. Additionally as you have such a range of makers you have a range shell options with modern guidance kits not really available for D30. There is also the logistics advantage of standardized guns. That is if you can share shells between your AH4, PLL01 and 155 SPH. As opposed to having 2 or 3 round types and the potential of finding oops the 122mm shells we need are not in the depot because we forgot to order them or just not enough room or the shells are really really old or they were used up in training.
155mm has more or less the world standard.
This means 1) active production and avalibilty of access to rounds from China, the US, Europe, Singapore, South Africa some middle east makers or even the Russians to some degree . Where as D30 has a smaller range of options for shell makers. Additionally as you have such a range of makers you have a range shell options with modern guidance kits not really available for D30. There is also the logistics advantage of standardized guns. That is if you can share shells between your AH4, PLL01 and 155 SPH. As opposed to having 2 or 3 round types and the potential of finding oops the 122mm shells we need are not in the depot because we forgot to order them or just not enough room or the shells are really really old or they were used up in training.
D
Deleted member 13312
Guest
That is not exactly true, in terms of large scale caliber rounds, the world is split largely between the 155mm and the 152mm. The only reason why most people think that 155mm is world standard because that is the round that is used in active warzones around the world. The Czech, Serbia, Ukraine, Russia, China and Belarus all still use and manufacture 152mms shells.
The Russian as of now have not introduced any kind of 155mm caliber rounds, whereas Ukraine and Belarus also manufacture 152mm caliber shells as well.
2 things wrong with this assertion, one is that 122mm shells are not only still manufactured by China and Russia, but also by Egypt, Israel, Serbia and the Cezch. Secondly, there is already easily acessible guidance kits for the D30 like the Krasnapol/Kitlov from Russia, as well as the 122mm GP5 from China.
While that is certainly true, there still remains a need for artillery shells of different caliber. The main reasons being easy of handling, transportation and rate of fire vs explosive power per shell. The 122mm in this case is exceptionally well suited for mountain and expeditionary warfare because it is more easily handled, yet still retains a respectable firepower. China for one readily understands this, which is why we see it fielding various SPGs and towed artillery of the 122mm caliber, which are equipped to mostly rapid reaction forces. If standardization is the end all be all, we did be seeing even infantry mortar being scaled up to the biggest 120mm calibers instead of the myriad of caliber in existence.